new forest wetland management plan 2006 - 2016 · lowland valley mire systems in western europe....

NEW FOREST WETLANDMANAGEMENT PLAN

2006 - 2016

NEW FOREST WETLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN2006 - 2016

LIFE02/NAT/UK8544 April 2006

Prepared by:Jane Smith

Forestry CommissionThe Queen’s House

Lyndhurst, Hampshire, SO43 7NH

Forestry CommissionEngland

Sust

ain

ab

le W

etl

an

d R

est

ora

tio

n i

n t

he

Ne

w F

ore

st -

A L

IFE

-Na

ture

Eu

rop

ea

n U

nio

n f

un

de

d p

roje

ct

Supporting Statements of Water Basin Management Forum Members

Dr Alan Drinkwater; Chairman

It has been a pleasant and constructive experience to act as the ‘independent’ chairman ofthe consultation Forum. This was the formal body created to meet one of the three mainobjectives stipulated for the LIFE III project-consultation with those living in the Forest andaffected by it in various ways.

I saw my role to facilitate the project and enable local members to learn and comment onthe project as it unfolded. At the final meeting, it was rewarding to learn that membershad found the Forum, and indeed the project as a whole, a helpful experience.

The practical achievements of restoration on the ground, and the ten-year ManagementPlan, together with a well-accepted consultation process will be the main focus of progress.There are three positive factors, which should be noted; receiving European Union fundingfor a second LIFE project in the New Forest was a cause for celebration. Members of theconsultation Forum were personally very committed, had clear views and were very protectiveabout their home and interests in the New Forest. And lastly, officers of the partnersresponsible for the work under the project were also professionally committed to the projectand worked well together.

Comments expressed by Forum Members

Joan Chessell – Brockenhurst Manor Fly Fishing Club

“It has been fascinating to watch the cautious and the sceptical being totally won over duringthe past three years. The calibre of the Forestry Commission, Environment Agency, NationalTrust and Hampshire County Council personnel involved in the administration and presentation,planning and execution of LIFE 3 quickly reassured forum members that this ambitious projecthad been well-researched and could be delivered. It has been delivered, on time and withinbudget.

The LIFE 3 exercise deserves to be used as a model of best practice in every sense of theword; it produced ‘added value’ by providing an arena for a multi-discipline/multi-interestgroup to interact; appreciate the other’s view; and forge links for the future.”

Neil Sanderson-Botanical Survey & Assessment

“LIFE 3 has demonstrated, that with sufficient resources and a will to think ‘BIG’ restorationof internationally important habitats is possible on a scale that nature conservationists havenot really contemplated before in Britain”.

Peter Frost- Verderer

“As someone who spent much of his childhood playing along the Forest streams, I havebeen particularly interested in this exciting project. Streams that were straight and deepare now meandering and shallow. Not only will this benefit wildlife, it will also make thesestreams as beautiful and natural as the majority of streams in the New Forest.”

John Durnell- Hampshire & Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust

“Whilst these very tangible gains are extremely important, obviously there have beenconsiderable achievements on the ground, in my opinion at least as important has been thedegree of trust that has developed during the consultation process. Drawing together adisparate group of stakeholders, who represent interests that have often been portrayed asconflicting, into an effective and representative forum is not an easy task. The feedback Ihave received from forum members is that the Life III process has been an excellent exampleof public consultation, within which each interest group has had a genuine opportunity topromote its particular interest.

We can only hope that improvements in understanding that have resulted from the processare as long lasting as the physical changes on the ground.”

Jennifer Tubbs- New Forest Association

“The New Forest Association appreciated the opportunity to send a representative to theForum and to be involved in the consultation process for individual proposals. The NFAwould like, in principle, to support the proposals to continue with sustainable wetlandrestoration”.

Acknowledgements

The development of the New Forest Wetland Management Plan has been helped considerablyby the provision of data, advice and feedback from staff and colleagues within the PartnerOrganisations and members of the Water Basin Management Forum.

In particular I would like to thank the following individuals for their significant contributionsand advice – Kevin Penfold, Bruce Rothnie, Simon Weymouth, Grace Ford, Simon Smith,Mike Abraham, Harry Oram and Richard Burke of the Forestry Commission, Maxine Elliott,Tim Holzer and Bethan Davies of the Environment Agency, Amanda Craig and DianaWesterhoff of English Nature, Jenny Tubbs of the New Forest Association, Richard Reevesof the Christopher Tower New Forest Reference Library and Julia Branson of Geodata forproducing the maps.

Jane Smith – May 2006

NEW FOREST WETLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

1.1 Background1.2 Purpose of the 10 Year Wetland Management Plan1.3 Geographic Boundaries1.4 Legislative Setting within the Water Framework Directive1.5 Methodology1.6 Organisation of the Plan

2 HISTORIC LEGACY & MANAGEMENT

2.1 Introduction2.2 Key Historical Events2.3 Summary

3 CATCHMENT CHARACTERISTICS

3.1 Introduction3.2 Climate3.2.1 Climate Statistics3.2.2 Climatic Issues3.3 Geology, Geomorphology & Soils3.3.1 Geological History3.3.2 Geomorphology3.3.3 Soils3.3.4 Geological, Geomorphological & Soil Issues3.4 Hydrology & Drainage3.4.1 Introduction3.4.2 The River Basins3.4.3 Channel & Floodplain geomorphology3.4.4 Flow 3.4.5 Flow Patterns3.4.6 Bank & Bed material3.4.7 Sediment Transport3.4.8 Debris Dams3.4.9 Erosion3.4.10 Water quality3.4.11 Abstractions3.4.12 Flooding3.4.13 Key Issues3.5 Ecology, Fisheries & Nature Conservation3.5.1 Introduction3.5.2 Habitat Description3.5.3 Riverine Woodland3.5.4 Bog Woodland3.5.5 Mires3.5.6 Wet Grassland3.5.7 Wet Heath3.5.8 Temporary & Permanent Ponds

i

3.5.9 Streams3.5.10 Fisheries3.5.11 Protected fish species3.5.12 Nature Conservation Designations3.5.13 Ecological, Fisheries & Nature Conservation Issues3.6 Landscape3.6.1 Existing Landscape3.6.2 Landscape Issues3.7 Archaeology & Cultural Heritage3.7.1 Existing Archaeology & Cultural Heritage3.7.2 Archaeological Issues3.8 Land Use3.8.1 Introduction3.8.2 Forestry3.8.3 Commoning3.8.4 Recreation3.8.5 Settlements & Infrastructure3.8.6 Land Use Issues3.9 Other Legislation,Plans & Strategies3.9.1 Existing Legislation, Plans & Strategies3.9.2 Issues relating to Plans & Policies

4 WETLAND RESTORATION WORKS4.1 Introduction4.2 Wetland Restoration Works (2002-2006)4.3 Future Works 4.4 Costs4.5 Monitoring4.5.1 Requirements for Formal Project Specific Monitoring4.5.2 Statutory Monitoring 4.5.3 Additional Monitoring4.6 Consents4.7 Maintenance4.8 Consultation4.9 Restoration Techniques4.9.1 Introduction4.9.2 Mire Restoration/Drainage channel infill using heather bales4.9.3 River Restoration Techniques4.10 Issues & Actions

5 CASE STUDIESCASE STUDY 1 HOLLY HATCH BOTTOM MIRE RESTORATIONCASE STUDY 2 STONY MOORS MIRE RESTORATIONCASE STUDY 3 HOLMSLEY INCLOSURE STREAM RESTORATIONCASE STUDY 4 MARKWAY STREAM RESTORATIONCASE STUDY 5 ALLUM GREEN LAWN RESTORATION

6 REFERENCES

7 GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS

A APPENDICES

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Location Plan

Figure 2 Main River Basins of the New Forest SAC

Figure 3 Historic Development of Inclosures

Figure 4 Geology

Figure 5 Topography & Relief

Figure 6 Soil Types within Inclosures

Figure 7 New Forest Watercourses and Gauging Stations

Figure 8 Sample Hydrograph of Gauged Daily Flows of River Lymington at Brockenhurst

Figure 9 Sample Hydrograph of Gauged Daily Flows – Dockens Water at Moyles Court

Figure 10 Dominant Flow Types

Figure 11 Bank Material Composition

Figure 12 Frequency of Debris Dams along Highland Water

Figure 13 Maximum Licenced Abstractions

Figure 14 Habitat Types

Figure 15 Comparison of frequency of fish species between sinuous and channelised reaches

Figure 16 Comparison of species density between sinuous and channelised stretches

Figure 17 Comparison of fish biomass between sinuous and channelised stretches

Figure 18 Designated Sites

Figure 19 Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs)

Figure 20 Crown Lands –Land Cover Classification

Figure 21 Categories of Crown Land Heathlands

Figure 22 Change in Forest Cover

Figure 23 Commons

Figure 24 Stock Numbers

Figure 25 Infrastructure and Settlements

Figure 26 Feeding Preferences of Cattle and Horses

Figures 27 - 34 Future Works

Figure 35 Consent and Consultation Process

Figure 36 Infill using heather bales and clay plugs

Figure 37 Use of log weirs

Figure 38 Restoration of natural meanders

iii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A Generic Management Policies & Prescriptions

Appendix B Water Basin Forum

Appendix C River Basin Districts

Appendix D Flow Data for Hampshire Avon Tributaries

Appendix E Water Quality Data

Appendix F Abstraction Points & Licences- New Forest Streams

Appendix G Status of Nature Conservation Designations

Appendix H Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs)

Appendix I Landscape Character Areas

Appendix J Verderer’s Policies

Appendix K Soil Wetness Classes

Appendix L Memorandum of Understanding

Appendix M Minister’s Mandate for the New Forest 1999 - 2008

Appendix N Debris Dam Policy

Appendix O Timber Management Protocol

Appendix P SSSI Favourable Condition Statements

Appendix Q List of Inclosure Names & Dates

iv

PART 1INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

LIFE 02 NAT/UK/8544 New Forest Wetland Management Plan

NEW FOREST WETLAND MANAGEMENT PLAN(2006-2016)

1 INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

1.1 Background

The New Forest, Hampshire (Figure 1) is of outstanding importance for nature conservationin the UK and Europe due to the size, quality and complex mosaic of habitats. In 1995, theUK government proposed 29,000 hectares of the New Forest as a candidate Special Area ofConservation (cSAC) and full status was achieved in April 2005. In terms of wetland habitats,the New Forest supports one of only four significant sites of bog woodland, together withone of the six best sites of riverine woodland (ancient residual alluvial forest) in the UK.Together with other scarce wetland habitats the Forest also contains the most extensivelowland valley mire systems in Western Europe. The network of rivers and streams in theForest, despite some interference by man, represent one of the best examples of a nutrientpoor, acidic, lowland stream network in southern Britain. In addition, the New Forest is nowthe most important area in the region for breeding waders. As a further enhancement toits status, the New Forest was designated a National Park in 2005.

The Forest’s unique history and associated land management practices of forestry andpastoral commoning have been largely responsible for the development and preservationof habitats and eco-systems in their present form as well as the cause of degradation insome areas. One of the greatest threats to the wetland habitats has been the lack of aholistic approach to the management of the hydrological networks which support thesehabitats. Indeed, man’s past interference has led to the decline of wetland habitats thoughdrainage and straightening of river channels leading to:

◆ Fragmentation of habitats following drainage & afforestation◆ Headward erosion of the mire system◆ Erosion of over straightened channels leading to increased deposition of gravel

downstream◆ Reduction in seasonal flooding◆ Impeded drainage due to remnant spoil banks◆ Scrub invasion◆ Introduction of exotics

The successful Life 2 Project, LIFE97/NAT/UK/4242 ‘Securing Natura 2000 Objectives in theNew Forest’, identified a series of generic prescriptions and management policies in relationto wetland habitats1 (Appendix A). Where wetlands have been identified as being inunfavourable condition these management prescriptions have been progressed under theLife 3 Project ‘Sustainable Wetland Restoration in the New Forest’ to achieve the sustainablerestoration of:

1 New Forest Special Area of Conservation Management Plan 2001

www.newforestlife.org/life2/managementplan.htm

1.1


◆ 261 ha of riverine woodland◆ 18 ha of bog woodland◆ 184 ha of valley mire◆ 141 ha of wet grassland◆ 10 km of river channel

A summary of the wetland habitats types and the issues affecting them is given in Table 1-1.

The Life 3 Project was implemented by a number of Partner Organisations comprisingHampshire County Council (HCC), Environment Agency (EA), Forestry Commission (FC),English Nature (EN), National Trust (NT) and the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds(RSPB). In addition a Water Basin Management Forum, comprising representatives from anumber of key organisations and individuals was set up to review the works and promotediscussion and understanding of the issues involved (Appendix B).

1.2 Purpose the of 10 year Wetland Management Plan

The purpose of this Wetland Management Plan is to carry forward the work achieved todate and take on board the lessons learned into the next 10 year period (2006-2016) toensure the continued long term sustainability and integrated management of the water-courses and wetland habitats. It is hoped that this will help prevent further decline of SAChabitats and bring them into favourable condition. Therefore, this Plan is intended to be apractical working document aimed at managers, planners and ground staff within thePartner Organisations to:

◆ Provide a summary of works carried out to date

◆ Indicate where future works need to be targeted and prioritised over a 10 year periodto help in the planning and funding of works

◆ Give an understanding of the local environmental conditions which prevail in the riverbasins to provide information and act as a starting point in the identification of any keyimpacts or issues which staff need to be aware of when planning future works or applyingfor consents.

◆ Draw upon lessons learned from the works to date by outlining the most successful restoration techniques for implementing future works

◆ Provide outline information on costs based on actual project experience

◆ Identify any additional survey, maintenance or monitoring programs which may be required to plan, progress or evaluate the impact and success of the works.

1.2


1.3 Geographic Boundaries

Under the terms of the Life 3 Project, the 10 year Wetland Management Plan is required tocover all six main river basins within the New Forest SAC (Figure 2):

◆ Lymington River◆ Avon Water◆ Beaulieu River◆ Bartley Water◆ Cadnam River◆ Hampshire Avon (south eastern tributaries)

Given the dynamic nature of river and wetland environments, the influence of workscarried out in the upper reaches of a river basin can have implications much furtherdownstream. Thus it is considered that where relevant, the study area will extend beyondthe SAC boundary to take in the geographic area defined by the New Forest National Park(Designation) Confirmation Order 2005. This boundary generally covers the extent of theriver basins. In the case of the Hampshire Avon, its south eastern tributaries which drain thewestern edge of the New Forest will be considered as far as their confluence with theRiver Avon.

1.4 Legislative Setting within the Water Framework Directive

The Wetland Management Plan is intended to be a practical working document that can beused to help achieve and implement the aims and objectives of the Life 3 Project. Althoughit will embrace the principles defined by the Water Framework Directive, it is not intendedto be a statutory document. Nor should it be confused with the more strategic River BasinManagement Plans which come under the remit of the Environment Agency. These planswill help promote more integrated river basin management and are due to be published bythe end of 2009. The New Forest SAC straddles the south-east and south-west river basindistricts (Appendix C) and it is envisaged that the Life 3 River Basin Implementation Plan willbe fed into the statutory river basin planning process as it develops.

1.5 Methodology

In developing the Implementation Plan data and information have been drawn from:

◆ Existing published reports and management plans◆ Data generated as part of the Life 3 project to date◆ Monitoring data generated by statutory bodies◆ Consultation with statutory bodies ◆ Consultation with Project Partners and members of the Water Basin Management

Forum

1.3


1.6 Organisation of the Plan

The Plan has been divided into 5 Parts:

Part 1 outlines the background and purpose of the Plan

Part 2 sets out the historic legacy and management of the Forest in order to provide anunderstanding of why the Forest is like it is today and to place many of the issues which arerelevant to wetland restoration into context.

Part 3 provides a description of the current catchment characteristics under the topicheadings of:

◆ Climate◆ Geology, Geomorphology & Soils◆ Hydrology & Drainage◆ Ecology, Fisheries & Nature Conservation ◆ Archaeology & Cultural Heritage◆ Landscape◆ Land Use◆ Other policies, plans & strategies

Key issues relevant to wetland restoration works are highlighted for each topic area.

Part 4 provides a summary of the restoration works carried out to date and outlines thelocation, priority, type and cost of future works that will be required to bring the wetlandhabitats back into favourable condition. It also provides an outline of the most successfulrestoration techniques used to date to help in the future planning and execution of restorationworks.

Part 5 sets out a series of case studies to highlight where some of the different restorationtechniques have been used along with an indication of project costs.

1.4


Tab

le 1

-1: S

um

mar

y o

f w

etla

nd

hab

itat

s ty

pes

an

d L

ife

3 is

sues

Wet

lan

d H

abit

atIs

sues

Wo

rks

req

uir

ed t

o r

esto

re t

o f

avo

ura

ble

Are

a o

f

Typ

eco

nd

itio

nR

esto

rati

on

(To

tal A

rea

HA

)A

chie

ved

Un

der

Lif

e 3

(200

2-20

06)

1.5

Stra

igh

ten

ing

an

d

ove

r d

eep

enin

g

of

chan

nel

s re

sult

ing

in

red

uce

d s

easo

nal

flo

od

ing

of

rip

aria

n w

oo

dla

nd

.C

reat

ion

of

dra

inag

e d

itch

es l

ead

ing

to

red

uce

d s

eep

age

and

ove

rlan

d f

low

Inva

sio

n o

f sc

rub

an

d e

xoti

cs.

Hab

itat

fr

agm

enta

tio

n

du

e to

fe

nci

ng

and

aff

ore

stat

ion

.Lo

ss

of

gra

zin

g

du

e to

re

du

ctio

n

ing

rou

nd

flo

raSa

me

issu

es a

s R

iver

ine

wo

od

lan

dD

amag

e d

ue

to d

rain

age

and

hea

dw

ard

ero

sio

n.

Dra

inag

e an

d

stra

igh

ten

ing

o

f ri

ver

chan

nel

s h

as r

edu

ced

sea

son

al f

loo

din

gre

sult

ing

in

dry

ing

an

d d

epri

vati

on

of

esse

nti

al

nu

trie

nts

ca

rrie

d

by

flo

od

wat

er.

Scru

b in

vasi

on

in d

rier

are

as.

Ero

sio

n f

rom

str

aig

hte

ned

ove

r st

eep

ened

chan

nel

s re

sult

ing

in

ex

cess

g

rave

ld

epo

sits

do

wn

stre

am.

Res

tora

tio

n o

f st

raig

hte

ned

ch

ann

el s

ecti

on

s to

recr

eate

nat

ural

riv

er c

ours

e an

d re

stor

e se

ason

alfl

oo

din

g t

ho

ug

h r

ein

stat

emen

t o

f m

ean

der

s,b

ed

leve

l ra

isin

g

and

in

stal

lati

on

o

f d

ebri

sd

ams.

Sele

ctiv

e m

anag

emen

t o

f sc

rub

an

d

cert

ain

exo

tics

.Po

llard

ing

an

d c

op

pic

ing

of

ho

lly.

Polla

rdin

g o

f so

me

oak

, ash

an

d b

eech

.

As

for

Riv

erin

e W

oo

dla

nd

Infi

llin

g o

f d

rain

s an

d e

rosi

on

rep

air.

Ch

ann

el r

esto

rati

on

wo

rkSe

lect

rem

ova

l of

scru

b

261

ha

+10

km o

f ri

ver

chan

nel

18 h

a18

4 h

a

141

ha

Riv

erin

e W

oo

dla

nd

Bo

g W

oo

dla

nd

Val

ley

Mir

es

Wet

Gra

ssla

nd

PART 2HISTORY, LEGACY & MANAGEMENT


2 HISTORIC LEGACY & MANAGEMENT

2.1 Introduction

The history of the New Forest and its associated legacy is intricately responsible for themanagement structure, customs and condition of the Forest today. On one hand the historicmanagement has helped to create and maintain the valuable mosaic of habitats found inthe Forest today while on the other it has led to the decline and degradation of the wetlandhabitats which the Wetland Management Plan is seeking to reverse. In order to understandthe need for wetland restoration and some of the issues which the works face, it is importantto appreciate this historic legacy and the associated conflicts which have led to the currentday position.

Certain key historical periods and events have been particularly important in shaping theNew Forest today as summarised in Table 2-1 with the most significant developmentsdescribed further below.

2.2 Key Historical Events

1079 - The designation of the New Forest as a royal ‘forest’ by William I

Although the area has been inhabitated since prehistoric times, the New Forest as we knowit today has its’ origins back in the 11th Century and the Saxon occupation. Entries in theDomesday Records suggest that the New Forest perambulation was created some timebetween 1066 and 1086 to provide a hunting forest for William 1 and his court. A medievalhunting forest was not a forest in its true sense, but a mix of woodland, heath, pasture andscrub whose management was devoted purely for hunting. Indeed it was a:

“ territory of woody grounds and fruitful pastures, privileged for wild beasts and fowl offorest, chase and warren, to rest and abide there in the safe protection of the King, for hisdelight and pleasure” (Manwood, 1598)

In order to protect the game and their associated habitats the Forest was governed by acomplex series of judicial and legal structures. Local inhabitants were forced to removefences, cease their own hunting activities and restrict fuel wood cutting. In compensationfor the curtailment of activities the inhabitants were granted certain forest rights, some ofwhich are still exercised by commoners today. For example, forest laws regulated grazingby livestock, allowed pigs to be turned out at certain times of the year to eat the fallenacorns and controlled the collection of fuel wood and turfs. Further Orders and Rulescontrolled an annual cycle of management in which dues were collected, animals marked,drifts made and “beasts of strangers” impounded for fine and collection. They alsocontrolled deer and timber exploitation and allowed for the enclosure of coppices. Indeedthe imposition of forest laws instigated many of the conflicts and issues between commonersand crown which still persist today!

The system of administering Forest Law was complex but it is known that there were twocourts. The lower court, the Swainmote, was held by the Verderers, who were elected bythe County on the King’s writ. They sat with a jury and heard presentments on Forestoffences and decided the appropriate course of action including passing on offences for

2.1


settlement in the higher court, the Forest Eyre. The Forest Eyre had both judicial andinvestigative functions and was assisted by the Regarders. The Regarders role was toinspect and report on the condition of the Forest every three years and one of their mainfunctions was to mark trees for felling.

Act of 1483

In the early days the emphasis was on managing the Forest for deer and other game andforestry was only a secondary consideration. It was not until the reign of Elizabeth I thatsilviculture gained any prominence under the Act of 1483. This Act encouraged the enclosureof forest coppices. The coppices were leased by “wood seller tenants” who could cut thehazel underwood and lop pollarded oak for fuel, charcoal, fence stakes and house repairs.However sapling oaks had to be left to mature for use by the Navy.

However, it would appear that Forest Law was not always strictly imposed. Poorly paidofficers remote from Crown supervision were often idle and corrupt while Forest rightswere regularly abused by the commoners, particularly in relation to the coppice system.During the 16th/17th centuries it became more difficult to lease coppices and regulationsrelating to coppice management were frequently abused. Reports from the Regardersrepeatedly note the inadequacy of the coppice system to preserve timber, mainly due toshort time scale of enclosure leading to lack of any management incentive. From 1612quantities of mature oak were felled to supply ship building in local Naval Yards, often fromthe open forest, but by late 17th century harvestable timber had declined to an all time low.

1698 Act of the Increase and Preservation of Timber in the New Forest

The 1698 Act allowed for the first large scale timber production through the permittedenclosure and planting of 6000 acres in a rolling programme over 20 years. In reality only3296 acres were ever planted, most being spurred on by the Napoleonic Wars and the needto keep generating timber for the Navy.

Although the 1698 Act gave statutory recognition to common rights and stipulated that theInclosures were to be on land which ‘could be best spared from the commons and highways’it led to significant conflict between Crown and commoner. More than a thousand free-holders and commoners petitioned against the Act and local resistance often led to brokenfences and incursions by stock. Furthermore, since the break down of Forest Law thecommoners had claimed the right to de-pasture stock on the Forest throughout the year.However, the 1698 Act reintroduced the regulation to remove stock from the forest duringthe fence month (14 days either side of midsummer day when deer calve) and duringwinter heyning (22 November to 4 May) when winter forage was low.

Maladministration and corruption continued to reign. By 1789 ‘The Fifth Report ofCommissioners to Enquire into the Woods, Forests and Land Revenues of the Crown’ report-ed that the New Forest was over run by deer, most of the forest customs had lapsed and theForest was regularly exploited by those entrusted to look after it. Indeed, three of theinclosures had been turned into rabbit warrens by the keepers who found it moreprofitable to rear and sell rabbits than tend trees!

2.2


1808 Act of the Increase and Preservation of Timber in Dean and New Forests

With concern about the poor state of timber production, the 1808 Act of the ‘Increase andPreservation of Timber in Dean and New Forests’ was passed which allowed for a further6000 acres to be enclosed. This instigated the actual enclosure of 5557acres between 1808and 1817 with a further 1147 acres enclosed between 1830–1848. It is in some of these earliestInclosures that wetland restoration work has or needs to be carried out to repair the dam-age originating from this time (Figure 3).

1851 Deer Removal Act

Increased afforestation was justified by the national need to supply the navy with timberbut it was not proving a popular move in the New Forest and the Crown needed to find asuitable motive for doing so. By this time no monarch had hunted in the forest for a fewhundred years and the deer population was seriously over stocked. Thus the 1851 DeerRemoval Act saw the Crown award itself a further 10,000 acres for silviculture as a compensationpayment for relinquishing the Crown’s right to stock the Forest with deer!

Despite most of the deer being eradicated, the Office of Woods still attempted to enforcethe fence month and winter heyning which together with the degree of afforestation andloss of common grazing enraged the commoners. In turn, the gentry many of whom werelandowners were further provoked because they could charge enhanced rents from landcarrying commoning rights. With increased Inclosure such areas were being drasticallyreduced.

Together with loss of grazing went the habitats of ancient mosaic woodland, heath, bogand lawn under a blanket of Inclosures. Where new inclosures were created the mainstreams were often straightened and new drains cut in tributary valleys. On the upstreamside the cutting of drains was usually restricted to within the inclosure boundary and indeedthe 1870 1:2500 O.S. maps show many of these tributary channels originating at boundaryof the inclosure fences. Over the years these channels have deepened significantly andextended well beyond the boundary fence into the open forest. It is in many of theseInclosures that wetland restoration works are taking place today to regenerate the wetlandhabitats damaged at this time.

The Act also allowed for species other than oak to be planted. Thus conifers were introducedboth as nurse crops for young oak and as pure stands within some inclosures on poorer soils.Indeed it was at this time that some of the biggest incursion of conifers into the forest tookplace.

It was the great landowners who led much of the campaign to save the Forest from furtherInclosure. In 1866 the New Forest Association was formed to organize opposition and petitionParliament. At the same time the New Forest’s landscape, ecology and amenity value wasbecoming increasingly recognised by outsiders, many of whom were wealthy, well educatedindividuals. The felling of large stands of old oak pollards and beeches to make way forregimented planting was not appreciated! The opening of the Southampton & DorchesterRailway in 1845, despite cutting a large swath through the forest, had done much to openthe Forest up to general recreation. Thus in 1877 the lobbying forces of landowners,

2.3


commoners and environmental campaigners alike were instrumental in producing the 1877New Forest Act.

It was also around this time, 1846-52, that some of the earliest drainage schemes took placeon the Open Forest to improve grazing on lawns. Indeed a number of subsequent schemescarried out in the 1920’s, 30’s, 50’s, 60’s and 70’s were focused around mires.

1877 New Forest Act

The 1877 New Forest Act restricted any further enclosure to the 17,645 acres enclosed underthe Acts of 1698, 1808 and 1851 with no more than 16,000 acres allowed to be enclosed atany one time. Significantly the remaining 45,000 acres of Crown common land, nowreferred to as the Ancient and Ornamental Woodland was to remain permanentlyunenclosed. Furthermore the Act established a new management body to control the exerciseof common rights - the Court of Verderers of the New Forest. They became a BodyCorporate with powers to manage the pastoral interests of the Forest as well as adoptingthe role of controlling development on the Open Forest. For 40 years or more followingthe 1877 Act, the Crown and Verderers were constantly at logger heads over their respec-tive roles and powers on the unenclosed forest. The Verderers insisted that the Crown onlyhad unimpeded rights within the Inclosures and anything on the open forest required theirconsent. Ultimately the cost of litigation between the Court and Office of the Woodsdrained the Verderer’s funds but lack of compromise ensured that the Forest remainedrelatively unchanged until 1914 and the impact of the First World War.

The Victorians, with their interest in landscape and amenity were instrumental in introducingornamental trees or “exotics” to the Forest. Between 1882–1889 around 3000 ornamentaltrees comprising 13 species were planted in and around the unenclosed Forest, includingTurkey Oak, Sweet Chestnut, Sycamore, Limes, Maples and Scarlet oaks. Although mostwere planted on roadsides and around villages a few were planted deeper in the forest andthese have left a legacy of secondary regeneration. One aspect of the wetland restorationwork is the removal of such exotics from the flood plain.

The War & Inter War Years

Through the wars years the Forest was intensively managed for timber production tosupport the war effort. Land acquisition for national interest during the Second World Warreeked havoc. Around 8,700 acres of land on the open forest was appropriated for militarytraining, airfields and firing ranges as well as growing crops. Although most has beenreturned to the Forest some has been poorly restored.

In 1924 the management of the New Forest passed to the Forestry Commission under theForestry (Transfer of Woods) Act, 1923 and became vested in the Minister of Agriculturerather than the Sovereign. The Forestry Commission embarked on implementing nationalforest policy which was essentially the conversion of broad-leaved woods to conifer plantations.Despite anger at some of the Forestry Commission’s felling policies during the interwaryears the Verderer’s Court was too weak and impoverished to have much influence.

2.4


The New Forest Act 1949

The New Forest Act 1949 overhauled the administration of the forest and revived theVerderer’s Court. Importantly for the current day administration of the Forest, it clarifiedresponsibilities between the Verderers and Forestry Commission. Section 11 is of particularrelevance:

“It shall be the duty of the Forestry Commissioners ……to carry out such work as appears tothem after consultation with the Verderers, and with due regard to the interests ofamenity…..for securing that the Forest will be properly drained, that culverts and bridgescrossing drains or streams in the Forest….will be properly maintained, and that the grazingwill be kept sufficiently clear of coarse herbage, scrub and self-sown trees.”

Indeed between 1965-1986, ninety-six drainage projects were carried out implementingSection 11 of the 1949 Act (Tubbs, 2001).

The Act also gave the Verderers power to authorize the Forestry Commission to enclose afurther 5000 acres of Open Forest for plantations but in return compensation had be paidto the Verderers for any land enclosed. These became known as the Verderers Inclosuresbut unlike earlier Inclosures they are only held on 150 year lease and have to be opened tostock for much of that time. In 1958 approval was given to enclose 2005 acres despitestrong opposition from the New Forest Commoners Defence Association, the New ForestAssociation and local residents.

The 1877 Act required that the “ancient ornamental woods and trees shall be preserved”.This sparked controversy over whether these woodlands should be left to regeneratenaturally or be subject to management intervention to secure regeneration. The resultingoutcome was that the 1949 Act gave the Forestry Commission powers, with the consent ofthe Verderers, to enclose small areas (no more than 20 acres) of the Ancient andOrnamental Woodlands in order to secure their future regeneration. These enclosures,known as the ‘A & O’ Regeneration Plots total 57 sites covering around 800 acres.


Although the 1964 Act was principally concerned with altering the perambulation inrespect of animal husbandry and range of pasture rights it did contain an important clausein relation to conservation, notably that the Forestry Commission and Verderers were to:

“have regard to the desirability of conserving flora, fauna and geological and physiographicalfeatures of special interest”

The Act also made provision for recreation by allowing the Forestry Commission with theVerderers’ consent to make camp sites on the unenclosed forest

2.5


The Ministers Mandate

Through the 1950’s and 1960’s, in order to comply with national forest policy, there was ahuge drive by the Forestry Commission to eliminate broad leaved trees within the Inclosuresand replace them with conifer plantations. Conifers are not generally suited to dampground and it was through the drainage and ground preparation for the plantations thatmany of the water courses were straightened leading to the damage to the hydraulic net-work which wetland restoration is seeking to address:

“Before planting, main watercourses had to be drained with a mechanical excavator and then the whole area ploughed at 51/ 2 ft. spacing with crawler tractors and special ploughs… On the worst soils, that is the compact gravels which often havean underlying pan, a subsoiler was used behind the plough in order to break the pan.” W.A. Cadman

The effects of drainage works are described further in Section 3.4.

However in 1969 an attempt was made to commercially exploit the unenclosed pasturewoods starting with the ‘thinning’ of Rushpole Wood. The public outcry was enormous andresulted in the Ministers Mandate 1971. This Mandate recognised the unique heritage andconservation value of the New Forest and essentially allowed the Forestry Commission tooperate a forest policy in the interests of the New Forest rather than Great Britain as awhole. Significantly the Mandate declared that the unenclosed woods were to be managedwithout regard to timber production and conversion to conifers within the Inclosures wasto cease.

The latest Ministers Mandate 1999 (Appendix M) places a further obligation on theForestry Commission to conserve the natural and cultural heritage and places a high priorityon maintaining the Forest’s traditional character.

Further protection to the nature conservation interests of the Forest has been gainedthrough agreements between the Forestry Commission and the Nature Conservancy Council(now English Nature). In 1959, three Forest Nature Reserves1 were established under anAgreement between the Nature Conservancy and the Forestry Commission and five areas2

of the Forest were notified as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) with further extensionsmade in 1971 and 1987 covering 28,947 hectares. Furthermore, recent designations of partsof the Forest as a RAMSAR site, Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special ProtectionArea (SPA) have helped to recognise the importance of the Forest on an International andEuropean level. Nature conservation objectives have not always been popular with allinterested parties. In particular there have been significant disputes with Commoners oversuch issues as scrub control and loss of grazing. Some see the more recent agreements andmanagement techniques as contrary to Section 11 of the 1949 Act quoted above.

1 Bramshaw Wood & Bramble Hill Walk, Mark Ash, Matley & Denny2 Beaulieu Heath East, Cranes & Vales Moor, Hatchet Pond, Linwood Valley, Wilverley Walk & Holmsley Station

2.6


Another legislative mechanism to improving the condition of the Forest has been theCountryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (CROW Act). The CROW Act amends the Wildlifeand Countryside Act to introduce a number of legislative measures that give greaterprotection to wildlife and enable the process of achieving favourable condition. In particularthe provisions of the CROW Act place clear duties and responsibilities on many organisa-tions and individuals to promote the interests and sustainability of these special sites and toview them as national assets.

The New Forest National Park Establishment Order 2005

The latest twist to the historic development of the Forest is the creation of the New ForestNational Park with the objectives to:

◆ conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the Park; and

◆ promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the Park's special qualities by the public.

The National Park Authority took over limited powers in April 2005 with full statutory func-tions relating to planning and right of access from 1 April 2006.

2.7


Table 2-1: Summary of Key Historic Events

Date

1079 - The designation of

the New Forest as a royal

‘forest’ by William I

Act of 1483

1698 Act of the Increase

and Preservation of Timber

in the New Forest

1808 Act of the Increase

and Preservation of Timber

in Dean and New Forests

1845

1846-52

1851 Deer Removal Act

1877 New Forest Act

The War & Inter War Years

1920’s-30’s

1924




1971

1971


1991

Countryside and Rights of

Way Act 2000 (CROW)

The New Forest National Park

Establishment Order 2005

2005

Historic Significance

Forest managed exclusively for deer and other game. Removal of all fences and

introduction of Forest Laws. Common rights granted as recompense

First introduction of silviculture allowing enclosure of small coppices for up to 7

years. Oak cut from Open Forest to supply timber for building naval ships

First large scale afforestation through the creation of Inclosures.

Conflicts with commoners over loss of grazing and imposition of Forest Laws. By

end of 18th C Forest poorly managed and timber supplies declining.

Allowed for creation of further 6000 acres of Inclosures to address declining

timber supply

Opening of Southampton & Dorchester railway bringing artists, naturalists and

other recreational users to the New Forest.

First drainage schemes to improve Forest for grazing

Culling of deer in return for Crown enclosing 10,000 acres of open forest. Forest

Laws of fence month and winter heyning still imposed which together with loss

of grazing led to large scale revolts among commoners and gentry. Large scale

introduction of conifers and drainage works

No further creation of Inclosures permitted other than that granted under previous Acts.

No further enclosure of Ancient & Ornamental woodland allowed

“Re-creation” of Court of Verderers to administer common rights and pastoral

interests remote from Crown influence.

Introduction of ornamental trees into Forest by Victorians

Forest intensively managed for timber production. Large tracts of land acquired

for airfields, firing ranges and food supply.

Further drainage of the Open Forest

Forestry Commission takes over responsibility for management of New Forest from

the Crown. National forest policy ensures that afforestation is vigorously pursued

Revived Verderers Court and clarified responsibilities between Verderers and

Forestry Commission. Act set out requirement for Forestry Commission to maintain

drainage and scrub control for grazing interests. Led to significant drainage

between 1965-1986.

Creation of Verderers Inclosures in return for compensation payments.

Afforestation led to further drainage and destabilisation of hydraulic network

Enclosure of small areas of Ancient and Ornamental woodland allowed to secure

its future regeneration.

Alteration of perambulation boundary and addition of fencing and cattle grids

to help control livestock movement and prevent accidents

Provision for creation of campsites

Obligation for Forestry Commission & Verderers to give due regard to nature

conservation interests.

In recognition of the unique environment of the New Forest permission was

granted to allow forest management to diverge from national policy of large

scale conifer planting.

Extension of New Forest SSSI

Places obligation on the Forestry Commission to conserve the natural and cultural

heritage and places a high priority on maintaining the Forest’s traditional character

Legislative requirements place duty on organisations and individuals to promote the

interests and sustainability of the Forest and to achieve favourable status of habitats.

New Forest designated a National Park

New Forest receives full status as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC)

2.8


2.3 Summary

So it can be seen that the Forest has had an interesting but turbulent history which hasgiven rise to the unique landscape, habitats and traditions which survive today. Past landmanagement practices have resulted in damage and degradation of important wetlandhabitats which restoration and management is seeking to reverse. The old conflicts and sus-picions between “Crown and Commoner” still simmer along with the Verderers workinghard to ensure that the Commoners rights and interests are wholly addressed. However, theimportance of nature conservation and the need to protect the unique heritage of theForest is being increasingly recognised and embraced by different organisations involved inthe management and working of the Forest. The process of consultation and involvementof those with an interest in the Forest has been key to progressing wetland restoration andmanagement to date and will continue to be so in the future.

It is impossible to give more than a potted history in this Section thus a list of furtherreading is given below.

FURTHER READING

Colin R. Tubbs, The New Forest, New Forest Ninth Centenary Trust 2001

New Forest Forestry Commission Guide, HMSO 1969

Anthony Pasmore FRICS, Historical Background to the New Forest can be foundin Management Plan for the Crown Land of the New Forest 2001-2006 (Appendix 5)

A Brief History from the Deputy Surveyor can be found in Management Plan forthe Crown Land of the New Forest 2001-2006 (Appendix 5)

Stephen L. Stover, Silviculture and Grazing in the New Forest: Rival Land Uses Over Nine Centuries, Journal of Forest History 1985

David Stagg, Silviculture Inclosure in the New Forest From 1850 To 1877, Proc Hampsh Field Club Archaeol Soc 48, 1992, 143-159

2.9

PART 3CATCHMENT CHARACTERISTICS


3 CATCHMENT CHARACTERISTICS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

Part 3 of the New Forest Wetland Management Plan describes the physical and socialenvironmental conditions prevailing in the New Forest river basins. Key issues associatedwith wetland restoration works and Life 3 works to date are also identified. It is not possibleto describe each subject area in a huge amount of detail in the context of this Plan thusfurther reading or sources of information via the internet are suggested at the end of eachtopic.

It is important to outline the existing environment because:

◆ An understanding of the environmental conditions prevailing in the river basins is an integral part of the Water Framework Directive as a tool in river basin planning. It is necessary to understand the catchment characteristics to appreciate the benefits or anynegative impacts which the works may have either in the immediate area or further downstream.

◆ An appreciation of the issues relating to topic areas can be useful both for planning purposes and aiding consultation with interested parties.

◆ Knowledge of the likely impacts of any works will allow planning of appropriate mitigation measures.

◆ The information provided on the existing catchment characteristics can provide a source of baseline information for preparing supporting documentation as part of theconsents process.

◆ Staff often change throughout the lifetime of a project and this section can be used asa starting point in their learning curve about the Forest.

3.1


3.2 CLIMATE

3.2.1 Climate Statistics

Located in the climatic region of central southern England, the New Forest generallyexperiences warm summers and mild winters. Rainfall is higher than average for south eastEngland. Small falls of snow are experienced most winters but large, extended falls are rare.Frosts are common, but night temperatures seldom fall below -9OC. The area is not subjectto frequent strong winds and values of windiness are classed as very suitable for all timberproducing species.

Climatic statistics for weather station at Everton the south of the Forest are shown in Table 3-1.

Table 3-1: Climate Statistics from Everton Weather Station (16m AMSL)(1971-2000 averages)

Month Max Min Days of Sunshine Rainfall Days of RainfallTemp oC Temp oC Air Frost Hours mm >=1mm

Jan 7.9 2.6 8.3 61.7 81.0 12.8Feb 7.9 2.3 7.2 81.1 58.7 10.3Mar 10.1 3.6 4.4 121.8 60.3 10.6Apr 12.4 4.7 2.0 181.5 48.4 8.8May 15.9 7.7 0.1 223.2 45.9 8.4Jun 18.4 10.4 0.0 212.4 51.9 7.8Jul 20.8 12.5 0.0 231.6 37.7 6.5Aug 20.8 12.6 0.0 223.2 49.5 7.1Sep 18.3 10.7 0.0 160.2 67.1 9.5Oct 14.9 8.2 0.3 120.0 88.0 10.9Nov 11.1 5.0 3.8 80.7 84.2 11.0Dec 9.0 3.6 6.3 53.3 91.2 12.1Year 14.0 7.0 32.5 1750.7 763.7 115.8

Source: Meteorological Office

Small micro climatic variations do occur across the Forest as a whole, generally in responseto topographic changes. For example, the highest levels of rainfall (around 900mm) tendto occur over the highest ground in the north and west. Rainfall is the principle source ofwater feeding the Forest streams via percolation and overland flow. As a result variationsin river flows tend to closely reflect the intensity and duration of rainfall thus the Foreststreams are characterised by their flashy nature. However, during prolonged, dry summersmany of the ponds, ephemeral wetlands and smaller streams dry out whilst others arereduced to a mere trickle.

3.2


3.2.2 Climatic Issues

a) Climate change

Climate is changing more rapidly now than at any time in the past ten thousand years. Akey factor in this warming is considered to be due anthropogenic activities, particularlygreenhouse gas emissions, because a large part of the warming cannot be explained bynatural climatic variations alone. The UK Climate Impacts Programme (UKCIP) has beencarrying out in depth modelling and research into the possible effects of climate change inthe UK, based on different climate change scenarios (Hulme et al, 2002). The general climaticchanges are summarised in Table 3-2.

Table 3-2: General Climatic Changes

Source: UKCIP

The MONARCH project, which is part of the UKCIP programme, has attempted to evaluatethe effects of climate change on nature conservation (Harrison et al, 2001). Monarch pro-vides climatic bioclassifications for the UK and considers changes for various scenarios basedupon different levels of atmospheric CO2. The majority of the New Forest lies withinBioclass 19, and the climate changes predicted for this class are shown in Table 3-3.

3.3

Climate Variable

Temperature

Precipitation

Humidity

Snowfall

UKCIP02 Scenario

Annual warming by the 2080s of between 1oC - 5oCdepending on region and scenario Greatest summer warming in the south-eastYears as warm as 1999 become very commonThermal growing season increases everywherewith largest increases in the south-east

Generally wetter winters for the whole UKPrecipitation intensity increases in winterSubstantially drier summer for the whole UKSummers as dry as 1995 become very common

Specific humidity increases throughout the yearRelative humidity decreases in summer

Total decreases significantly everywhere

RelativeConfidence LevelHigh

HighHighHigh

HighHighMediumMedium

HighMedium

High


Table 3-3: Climate Characterisation of Class 19 for UKCIP98 Climate ChangeScenarios (located in southern and eastern England)

Climatic UKCIP Climate Change ScenariosVariables 2020LO 2020ML 2020MH 2020HI 2050LO 2050ML 2050MH 2050HISummer +0.6oC +1.1 oC +1.3 oC +1.5 oC +0.9 oC +1.5 oC +2.1 oC +2.5 oCTmeanWinter +0.5 oC +0.8 oC +1.3 oC +1.4 oC +0.9 oC +1.5 oC +2.0 oC +2.3 oCTmeanSummer -5.6% -5.6% -5.6% -5.6% -5.6% -5.6% -16.7% -16.7%RainWinter +4.0% +4.0% +8.0% +8.0% +4.0% +8.0% +8.0% +12.0%RainSummer 2.7% 5.4% 8.1% 8.1% 5.4% 8.1% 13.5% 16.2%PETWinter 0.0 0.0 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0%PETAnnual 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0WindspMax 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7% 0.0 1.7% 1.7% 1.7%Windsp

Tmean is mean air temperature, Rain is rainfall, PET is Potential evapotranspiration, Windsp is mean

monthly windspeed. LO, MH, HI refers to different scenarios of CO2 concentrations.

The predicted climate changes have potentially significant consequences for the New Forestwetlands, for example:

◆ Increase in winter flooding and erosion potential◆ Increasing frequency of summer drying ◆ Possible increase in levels of invasion by alien species, pests & diseases◆ Change in hydrological regime◆ Changes in water quality due to increased temperatures resulting in lower levels of

available oxygen increased biological respiration rates leading to reduced levels of dissolved oxygen

◆ Changes in fish and macroinvertebrate populations◆ Changes in species diversity◆ Changes in species distribution including that of wetland waders◆ Reduction in drought intolerant species such as Beech ◆ Rising sea levels

Therefore it is important that the wetland habitats and the hydrological regimes that supportthem are restored to a favourable condition to allow them the opportunity to withstandand deal more effectively with climatic extremes.

All the LIFE Project Partners are members of the South East Climate Change Partnershipwhose mission is to investigate, inform and advise of the threats and opportunities arisingfrom the impacts of climate change in South East England and to promote adaptive planningin the region.

3.4


b) Increased evaporation due to vegetation clearance and low summer flows

Concern has been expressed that during the summer months, the clearance of stream sidevegetation, particularly in Inclosures, would allow more sunlight to penetrate to the streambed. This could increase water temperatures leading to greater evaporation rates and thusmore rapid drying out of streams with associated effects on fish and macroinvertebrates. Itis considered that to date this has been a localised effect related to the scale of clearance,with plenty of shade still existing elsewhere along the river corridor and that the benefitsof streamside clearance have outweighed any local disbenefits. However when planningfuture works it is worth considering the vegetation balance along the stream and possiblypreserving certain patches of overhanging scrub particularly where previously heavily shadedriver corridors have been cleared and opened up.

Further Reading

Broadmeadow M. (2002) Bulletin 125 : Climate Change: Impacts on UK Forests.Forestry Commission

Broadmeadow M. & Ray D. (2005) Information Note – Climate Change and British Woodland. Forestry Commission

Harrison, P.A. et al (2001) Climate Change and Nature Conservation in Britainand Ireland: Modelling natural resource responses to climate change(the MONARCH project). UKCIP Technical Report, Oxford

Hulme, M. et al (2002) Climate Change Scenarios for the United Kingdom:The UKCIP02 Scientific Report, Tyndall Centre for Climatic Change Research,School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, UK

www.climatesoutheast.org.uk

3.5


3.3 GEOLOGY, GEOMORPHOLOGY & SOILS

3.3.1 Geological History

The New Forest lies in the centre of a chalk syncline known as the Hampshire Basin. Themajority of rocks are sedimentary, comprising soft clays and sands laid down during theTertiary Period (60-40 million years ago) which give rise to the largely free-draining acidicsoils of the New Forest. The rocks tilt gently southwards at an angle of 1o – 2o with the oldestexposed in the north and the youngest in the south. Some of the earliest deposits can befound in the basins of Cadnam and Hampshire Avon tributaries. Southward there aresequential exposures of Bagshot Sands, Bracklesham Beds, Barton Sands and Barton Clays.The key geological characteristics of these deposits are summarised in Table 3-4 and theirdistribution shown in more detail in Figure 4.

Tertiary deposits were laid down during the Eocene and Oligocene Epochs by shallowinshore seas, in deltas, estuaries and lagoons on the eastern and southern margins of alow-lying hinterland. At times the sea level rose to cover the whole area but only for shortperiods. During the Eocene the climate was that of tropical low lands such as those foundin south–east Asia today. By Oligocene times a marked cooling had set in and the floraindicates subtropical swamp conditions like those of present day Florida.

During the Quaternary period the Tertiary deposits were overlain by superficial sheets ofgravel and brickearth laid down by the extensive Solent River system. A distinctive featureof the Quaternary gravels is their angular flints. The Solent River system may have developedback in the Anglian Glaciation 450,000 years ago, but would have been disrupted duringsea-level rise during inter-glacial periods. The climate varied greatly during this time withsuccessive glacial and interglacial period with tundra conditions prevailing for much of thetime. Large amounts of gravel would have been washed from more upland areas followingsnowmelt each year. Though much eroded, particularly in the north, extensive remnants ofthe gravel and Brickearth deposited by ancient river systems still survive as flat terraces. Onthe terraces below 80m there are extensive deposits of Brickearth up to 3m deep resting ontop of gravel or infilling ancient drainage channels.

Rising sea levels over the last 10,000 years caused the river valleys to become drowned andinfilled by fluvial deposited sands and gravels. More recent deposits of alluvium and peatcan be found in the valleys and floodplains of the modern day river system.

Seven sites of special geological or physiographic interest are designated within the NewForest SSSI as highlighted in Table 3-5.

3.6

new forest wetland management plan 2006 - 2016 · lowland valley mire systems in western europe....

Documents